Communities Against Drugs Initiative: Funding Distribution

Lord Gordon of Strathblane: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How they will allocate the additional money being made available to Crime and Disorder Partnerships in England and Wales for the Communities Against Drugs initiative, and how much each partnership will receive.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced in the Budget Statement that an additional £220 million would be made available over the next three years to Crime and Disorder Partnerships as part of the Communities Against Drugs initiative. This money, which is to be spent in agreement with local police commanders and Drug Action Teams, will be used to disrupt local drug markets, and tackle drug related crime. All partnerships will benefit from this funding, but those with the largest populations and most serious problems will benefit most.
	My right honourable friend the Home Secretary is now able to announce the allocation of the funding for 2001-02. It is important that partnerships know their allocation for this financial year quickly in order to plan its use. In order to let them know this important information in good time, we have used a simple and straightforward allocation formula based on relevant and readily available information. The formula shares 20 per cent of funds across all partnerships in England and in Wales, allocates 50 per cent on the basis of certain recorded crimes which are often linked with drug abuse (burglary, robbery, theft and theft of and from a vehicle) and 30 per cent on the basis of population levels. Each partnership will receive at least the same allocation of money in the following two years. The final allocations for 2002-03 and 2003-04 will be announced by the end of July.
	A new Communities Against Drugs Toolkit is now available on the Crime Reduction website, www.crimereduction.gov.uk, and Crime and Disorder Partnerships will find this a valuable tool in helping them use this funding.
	A paper showing the detailed allocations to each partnership, and further information about the funding formula, has been placed in the Library, and my honourable friend the Minister of State at the Home Office, Mr Clarke, will write to honourable members for constitutuences in England and Wales with the same information.

Consolidation Bills: Joint Committee Meetings

Lord Brightman: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	On how many days the Joint Committee on Consolidation Bills met in each of the Sessions 1998-99, 1999-2000 and the present Session.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: The meetings of the Joint Committee on Consolidation Bills are not a matter for the Government. However, I can tell the noble Lord that the Sessional Returns of the House of Commons contain information on meetings of all Joint Committees. The noble Lord could also refer to http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt/jtconsol.htm.

House of Lords: Report of Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Berkeley: asked the Leader of the House:
	Whether she has received the report of the working group appointed to consider the recommendations of the Committee on Standards in Public Life on Standards of Conduct in the House of Lords.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: I received the report of the Working Group on Monday 23 April. I have arranged for it to be published on Tuesday 1 May at 10.15 am. Copies will be available in the Printed Paper Office as soon as the report is published. Arrangements will be made to debate the report in the House in due course.

Zimbabwe: Commonwealth Ministerial Mission

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Following the decision of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group on 20 March to send a Commonwealth ministerial mission to Zimbabwe in order to convey its concerns to the Government of Zimbabwe and to offer any appropriate Commonwealth assistance, when the mission is expected to take place.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The timing of the mission is for the Commonwealth Secretariat to decide in consultation with the Government of Zimbabwe.

Nice Treaty: Enhanced Co-operation Measures

Lord Shore of Stepney: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 13 March (WA 80), whether as a result of the Treaty of Nice a single state can no longer exercise a last resort veto at a meeting of the European Council on proposals for enhanced co-operation, provided that those proposals are backed by at least eight member states and fulfil the other conditions laid down in the Treaty.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Under the Treaty of Nice, the last resort veto on the use of enhanced co-operation in Pillars One and Three will be replaced by an appeal clause mechanism. This will allow a member state to seek discussion by the European Council of a proposal for enhanced co-operation before any decision is taken.
	All proposals for enhanced co-operation must meet the rigorous conditions set out in the treaty. The Government believe the appeal clause mechanism provides the right balance between the interests of the member states and the benefits of greater flexibility in an enlarged EU.

Solomon Islands

Lord Swinfen: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Solomon Islands Government is financially able to maintain a satisfactory level of fuel stocks to service its export trade and internal fuel requirements; and, if not, what assistance they are providing.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: There is currently no export trade, as all the large exporting companies left the country during the ethnic unrest which divided the country for most of last year, and they have not as yet returned. The Solomon Islands Electricity Authority (SIEA) can only buy fuel for its generators on a cash on delivery basis. In an attempt to generate income, the SIEA has told its customers that they will have to pay their bills within 15 days instead of giving them the usual month's grace. The Solomon Islands Government cannot afford to import fuel.
	The British Government, along with other international donors, provides aid to other areas of the economy and has encouraged the Solomon Islands Government to draw up a national budget so that we can consider with it how best to move towards a more sustainable economy.

European "Reunification"

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the continent of Europe was last in the condition of "unification" implied by the Foreign Secretary when he referred to "the reunification of Europe" in his Explanatory Memorandum on the Treaty of Nice.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Europe has been divided for generations by wars and the Iron Curtain. Enlargement is an historic opportunity to end that division and entrench peace, stability, free markets and democracy across our continent.

Mr Illie Ilascu

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are discussing the case of Mr Illie Ilascu, imprisoned in Tiraspol since 1992 (Inter-Parliamentary Union Ref. MOL/01) with the relevant authorities both in the Republic of Moldova and inter-governmentally, with particular reference to his state of health and access to him by the International Committee of the Red Cross.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Her Majesty's Government support the work of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Mission to Moldova in monitoring the conditions of detention of Mr Ilascu, and the efforts of the International Committee of the Red Cross to gain access to Mr Ilascu. Latest reports from the OSCE Mission in Chisinau suggest that Mr Ilascu's health is not currently deteriorating. Her Majesty's Government also support the Council of Europe's efforts to guarantee a fair retrial for Mr Ilascu in a neutral country. Representatives from the Council of Europe met with Mr Ilascu last July. The case is also being examined by the European Court for Human Rights.

Foot and Mouth Disease: Government Departments' Websites

The Earl of Northesk: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Answer by Lord Bassam of Brighton on 19 March (H.L. Deb., col. 1156), whether, at that time, the advice on the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food website was wholly consistent with that on the Department for Culture, Media and Sport website.

Baroness Hayman: My noble friend Lord Bassam of Brighton said in his Answer of 19 March that the advice on the foot and mouth outbreak on the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food website is updated every day. The site contains advice and guidance for those wishing to visit the countryside. I am aware that the Department for Culture, Media and Sport website also contains advice on precautions to take when visiting the countryside at this time. The two departments have been in regular contact with each other since the beginning of the present outbreak to provide consistency in the advice issued to the public on the respective websites.

Foot and Mouth Disease: Diagnosis

Lord Inglewood: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, during the early stages of the current outbreak of foot and mouth disease, they relied primarily on laboratory rather then clinical diagnosis; if so, why this approach was adopted; and how much delay it caused before infected animals were slaughtered.

Baroness Hayman: It is standard practice in a disease-free country to confirm foot and mouth disease using laboratory tests and this is required by Council Directive 85/511/EEC. However, during an outbreak, foot and mouth disease may be diagnosed clinically when there is a clear link to other infected animals.
	The animals in the first outbreak reported were put under movement restrictions immediately on suspicion of infection, and the diagnosis was confirmed by the Institute for Animal Health (IAH) at Pirbright the following day. The IAH carry out an ELISA test; which takes about five to six hours to complete.
	As the outbreak has progressed, we moved quickly to a position whereby a greater proportion of cases were diagnosed on clinical signs. Our policy is now to slaughter immediately on clinical diagnosis or suspicion of disease.

Foot and Mouth Disease: Livestock Slaughter Payments

The Duke of Montrose: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in the light of the fact that, under the livestock welfare disposal scheme, farmers will be offered 10 per cent less for breeding ewes and 31 per cent less for cull ewes than under the optimal standard valuation of the slaughter scheme, there is any risk that farmers facing financial difficulties and living within three kilometres of an infected farm will be tempted to introduce the foot and mouth virus to their stock thereby spreading the disease.

Baroness Hayman: Any livestock farmer deliberately infecting his livestock simply to obtain a marginal monetary advantage over the value of his stock would be acting both illegally and against the best interests of all his neighbours in the farming industry and everyone in the surrounding area. No compensation would be available for any consequential loss connected with the compulsory slaughter of infected animals.
	The rates of payment under the Livestock Welfare (Disposal) Scheme are aimed at addressing welfare problems. The payments are not compensation, and the scheme is not designed to provide an alternative market. Payment relates to resolving an identified welfare problem, not to the value of the livestock.

Foot and Mouth Disease Vaccine Storage

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What has been their policy in relation to the storage of vaccine against foot and mouth disease in the United Kingdom.

Baroness Hayman: Stores of vaccines have to be held under appropriate conditions to ensure their safety and validity. Vaccine is stored at the Foot and Mouth World Reference Laboratory in Pirbright, Surrey.

Factortame Litigation

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will publish the documents disclosed for the purposes of the Factortame litigation, referred to in the skeleton arguments of the applicants and respondents in 1997; and if not, why not.

Baroness Hayman: The Government are willing to publish documents in accordance with the normal procedures of the Public Record Office or operated under the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information. The events leading up to the enactment of the Merchant Shipping Act 1988 were examined and described in detail in the judgments of the English courts in the Factortame case. Those judgments cite and often quote from the government documents which the courts regarded as central to an understanding of the matter, and we have already published those documents following the noble Lord's earlier request. Experience of his earlier question shows that specific requests of this kind for access to documents are most appropriately addressed in correspondence to enable requests to be clarified and avoid misunderstanding. As we have also received a letter from the noble Lord containing a further request for Factortame documents, we shall ensure that his present Question is addressed in our reply and will be made available in the Libraries of the House.

Farming and Tourism: Contribution to Gross Value Added

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the estimated annual contribution to Gross National Product of farming and tourism respectively in (a) Cumbria; and (b) the Lake District National Park.

Baroness Hayman: Comparable estimates are only available in terms of Gross Value Added at basic pricesa, GVA. Estimates are not separately available for the Lake District National Park. The approximate contributions made by the agricultural industry and the tourism industry in Cumbria in 1999 to Gross Value Added at basic prices are as follows:
	
		
			   Percentage of total GVA 
			  GVA Cumbria UK 
			 Agricultural Industry £140 million 2 per cent 0.02 per cent 
			 Tourism Industry (b) £435 million 7 per cent 0.06 per cent 
		
	
	(a) Gross value added denotes estimates that were previously known as gross domestic product at basic prices, i.e. which include subsidies less taxes on products. Gross National Product is the income available to residents arising from gross domestic product, and receipts from, less payments to, the Rest of the World of employment, property income and current transfers.
	(b) Assumes that gross value added at basic prices of the tourism industry equates to 50 per cent of tourist expenditure.

Small Local Abattoirs: Start-up Funding

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in the light of distances travelled by animals from the more remote parts of the country, they will establish a fund for the setting up of small local abattoirs.

Baroness Hayman: The Government recognise that small local abattoirs can make an important contribution to the rural economy and have taken steps to improve their viability by allowing them to pay only those meat inspection charges fixed by the EU as flat rates per head of livestock slaughtered, rather than the actual cost of inspection (where the latter would be higher). The cost of this support is estimated to be £8.7 million per year.

Foot and Mouth Disease: Assistance by Hunt Servants

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What numbers of hunt servants have been used to help with the slaughter of animals in the foot and mouth outbreak.

Baroness Hayman: Hunt kennel men are being used within slaughter teams, particularly in Cumbria. As of 17 April, between 20 and 30 hunt kennel men were involved in this work. The Countryside Alliance is providing details of kennel men to the Ministry. This information is then disseminated to the slaughter teams.

Foot and Mouth Disease: Vaccination Approval

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Statement by Baroness Hayman on 9 April (H.L. Deb., col. 1013), what are the "certain circumstances" under which the European Union Standing Veterinary Committee has given its approval for vaccination in the United Kingdom.

Baroness Hayman: The European Union Standing Veterinary Committee agreed to the UK carrying out emergency vaccination of cattle in Devon and Cumbria, subject to a number of conditions. These are set out in full in Commission Decision 2001/257/EC. This envisages the vaccination of all cattle over one week of age within defined vaccination zones, imposes restrictions on their movements within specified periods and applies requirements for the treatment of their products. A copy of the Decision has been placed on the MAFF website http://www.maff.gov.uk.

Swine Fever: Payment Scheme

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why the swine fever animal welfare payment scheme approved by Parliament on 7 March is not being implemented, leaving farmers with money overdue; and whether, under these circumstances, they will be paying interest on the money owed to farmers under this scheme.

Baroness Hayman: On 26 August 2000 the Pig Industry (Disposal) Scheme (PWDS) was introduced. The scheme ran until 30 December 2000, by which time it had cost the Government £14 million, of which £9 million has been paid direct to pig producers. Part of the agreement between the Government and the National Pig Association/National Farmers Union on the PW(D)S was that the industry would provide top-up funding. The funding for the top-up would be collected in the form of an industry levy of 20p per pig slaughtered.
	The only vehicle available to introduce a compulsory levy on pig producers was a Meat and Livestock Commission (MLC) originated development scheme under the 1967 Agriculture Act. Following formal consultation procedures on a Pig Industry Development Scheme (PIDS), that ended on 23 January, an order was progressed through Parliament. This order passed into law on 14 March.
	Partly because of the reduced throughput of livestock for human consumption as a result of the FMD outbreak, producers realised that it could take well over two years to collect the £4 million that was required to meet the industry's obligations under PIDS. To help producers at this time of crisis, my right honourable friend the Minister decided to short-circuit this delay by providing an interest-free government loan so that the top-up could be paid quickly. As he announced at the time, the money will reach producers in the course of April and May.

Rendlesham Forest: Tree Felling

Lord Hill-Norton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they requested or instructed the Forestry Commission to fell any trees in Rendlesham Forest or Tanham Woods in the aftermath of the Rendlesham Forest incident; and, if so, on what grounds.

Baroness Hayman: The Forestry Commission was not instructed to fell any trees after the alleged incident in Rendlesham Forest in December 1980. Most of the trees in the area had been selected and marked for felling well before the alleged incident and were felled several months after it.

Pig Industry Outgoers Scheme

Lord Gordon of Strathblane: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many pig farmers were offered aid under the Outgoers 1 scheme, and on what basis tenders were assessed.

Baroness Hayman: The Pig Industry Restructuring Scheme (PIRS)--Outgoers closed for applications on 2 March, and all applicants were informed of their success or otherwise on 23 March. There were a total of 1,237 bids in the UK as a whole (England 650, Northern Ireland 510, Scotland 53, Wales 24). A total of 205,327 sow places were offered, greatly exceeding the target of 120,000 sow places.
	As was made clear from the beginning, successful bids under PIRS--Outgoers would be assessed on a value for money basis. To achieve this, bids were assessed using a value for money criterion agreed by MAFF and the devolved authorities in advance of opening the bids. This was done in order to avoid any accusations of manipulating the criterion to achieve a specific result.
	The criterion defined what would be judged as value for money in terms of cost per sow place. It was agreed that bids greater than 125 per cent of the average (the top 10 per cent and bottom 10 per cent of tenders were removed while calculating the average figure) tender bid in terms of £ per sow place would be rejected. The highest tender to be accepted was calculated at £237 per sow place, giving a maximum payment of £142 per sow place (the full 60 per cent allowable was paid to successful applicants).
	The final result of PIRS--Outgoers was a total of 432 accepted bids (England 315, Northern Ireland 87, Scotland 20, Wales 10), with an average tender of £185 per sow place (average payment of £111 per sow place). A total of £10.6 million has been offered to the successful applicants.
	Payments are now being made to the first claims under PIRS--Outgoers from successful applicants.

Tourism, New Media and Information Society Projects: EU Support

Lord Harrison: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What investment they have had in projects relating to tourism, new media and the information society supported by the European Union's 5th programme on Research and Technological Development (1999-2004); and what impact they expect these projects to have.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Within the Information Society Technologies (IST) programme of the EU 5th Framework to date, UK organisations have won 1.23 million (£763,000) in total from four tourism projects, and have won 35.5 million (£22 million) in total from 77 new media projects. With regard to information society projects (that is, all projects in the IST programme including tourism and new media), UK organisations have won total funds of 230 million (£142.6 million) from 674 projects. This represents 14.8 per cent of the total EU funds on offer.
	All the projects support the objective of European competitiveness and are expected to produce innovative technologies of broad application to support UK business and daily life. Additional impact will be gained from creation of new market opportunities, closer collaboration between business and the academic community and forging stronger links with European partners.

UK Jobs and EU Membership

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the written Answer by Lord Sainsbury of Turville on 3 April (WA 112), whether they consider that, even without negotiating a free trade agreement with the European Union, no jobs or very few jobs would be permanently lost if the United Kingdom were to leave the European Union.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: A decision to withdraw from the European Union would change the planning assumptions of many overseas companies which regard the UK as a natural entry point into the EU market. This would not only impact on the UK's attractiveness for new inward investment, but also on the retention of existing investment, especially European HQ operations.

UK Withdrawal from EU: Tariff-free Access to Single Market

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Sainsbury of Turville on 3 April (WA 112), whether they see any reason why the United Kingdom would not continue to enjoy tariff-free access to the Single Market if it left the European Union after signing a free trade agreement with the European Union.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The United Kingdom would enjoy tariff-free access to the Single Market to the extent such a free trade agreement allowed.

Foot and Mouth Disease: Assistance to Equestrian and Other Rural Businesses

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are considering giving financial help in the form of a loan to British equestrian-based businesses affected by the outbreak of foot and mouth disease.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My right honourable friend Michael Meacher, the Minister for the Environment, met representatives from British equestrian-based businesses on 9 April.
	In the other place on 23 April, Michael Meacher outlined the positive steps that are being taken by government to help rural businesses.
	These include a number of measures to provide relief from business rates. They include increased government funding, from 75 per cent to 95 per cent, to enable local authorities to offer hardship rate relief to businesses in rural areas, targeted at businesses below £12,000 rateable value, and offering reductions of up to £1,290 over a three-month period. A further measure is the deferment, by three months, of the deadline for business rate appeals in rural areas.
	Rural businesses will also be helped by the Government's legislation to extend mandatory 50 per cent. rate relief to all food shops in small rural settlements, and that legislation will also provide a transitional, five-year, 50 per cent. mandatory rate relief for new enterprises on former agricultural land. At the same time, recent regulations have extended 50 per cent. rate relief to sole village pubs and garages with a rateable value of less than £9,000. It has also been arranged that, when a rural local authority agrees to defer payments, my department will in turn defer the payments that the authority is due to make to the national rate pool. The Valuation Office will consider applications from businesses for a reduction in their rateable value to take account of the impact of foot and mouth disease.
	The Inland Revenue and Customs and Excise will take a sympathetic approach to requests for deferral or extended time to pay for tax and national insurance contributions, especially for rural businesses in agriculture, transport and tourism, and related retail businesses.
	The major banks have made it clear that they will, on a case-by-case basis, consider mechanisms such as extended lines of credit, capital repayment holidays and other measures.
	The types of business that can apply for loans up to £250,000 under the small firms loan guarantee scheme have been extended.
	Michael Meacher announced a further £15 million for regional development agencies to help rural businesses in the worst hit areas. To help those who have lost work because of foot and mouth, the Benefits Agency has announced that it will provide quick assessment of applications for jobseeker's allowance from such applicants. My honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education and Employment has announced a skills boost package to ease the impact of foot and mouth disease on jobs.
	The Government have pledged to match public donations to rural charities, to help to address cases of severe hardship and to provide support for organisations responding to rural stress. The scheme is being administered by the Countryside Agency and will apply to personal donations, including the generous donations of the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Westminster.
	The Countryside Agency will also make available grants of £3.8 million to help local authorities to open their footpaths. Further advertising by tourism organisations is being promoted by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, and my right honourable friend the Secretary of State announced additional support of £6 million for the English Tourism Council and the British Tourist Authority to get the message across that Britain is open for business.
	That all adds up to a total package of immediate practical help for the rural economy of more than £200 million. The task force will continue to consider longer-term measures to help to get the rural economy moving when the disease has been dealt with.

Greater Manchester Brain Injury Vocational Centre

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in advance of their response to the Report of the House of Commons Health Committee on head injury rehabilitation, they will take any interim action to safeguard the future of brain injury rehabilitation services in the Greater Manchester area; and
	What representations have been received by Ministers concerning the impending closure of the Greater Manchester Brain Injury Rehabilitation Centre; and what action they are taking.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: We have received 14 letters from Members of Parliament as well as from Mr George Wilson, Chairman of Rehab UK, about the future of the Greater Manchester Brain Injury Vocational Centre. A further five Parliamentary Questions were tabled, together with one Early Day Motion.
	Decisions about which services to provide in any particular area must continue to be the responsibility of the local councils and health authorities, which will need to take into account the local circumstances, needs and priorities of the communities they serve, as well as the other available services.

House of Lords: Writs of Summons

Lord Northbrook: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	Whether Writs of Summons to Members of the House of Lords are the personal property of each individual Peer; and, if so, whether they should be returned to them after submission (together with previous Writs) if the Peer so requests.

Lord Tordoff: Until the 1951-52 Session, Writs of Summons were not returned to Lords. Since then, Writs have been returned to Lords who request them during the Parliament to which they relate. When the Writs are "spent" (i.e. at the end of each Parliament) those remaining are preserved amongst the archives of the House, together with other surviving Writs dating back to 1559.
	In May 2000 the Administration and Works Sub-Committee reaffirmed that "spent" Writs should be considered part of the Parliamentary Archive, and should not be returned to Lords on request.